Total anarchy in Hastings for Amber Rudd

[beorhthelm]

..The tory government doesn't give a flying fu ck about us "normal" people (unless trying to get our vote) they are for the rich.

always amuses me, so today i think we'll ask, name a policy under this government that is "for the rich". i can think of one borderline (that benefits anyone).

and on anecdotes, a couple i know used to live in Hastings slight left wing, were screwed by the last Labour government's nanny state largess known as working tax credits. they got caught up in the "you got paid more than we thought you should " debacle and had to pay back thousands. they didnt "need" the credits in the first place but were encouraged to claim. when she got a better job that took them above the threshold, she said that was that was best part of the promotion, and would never vote Labour again for causing so much stress.

 

[AlastairWatts]

She's also publicly made derogatory remarks on Hastings and it's people, (on drugs and benefits) as have others on this thread, which for some reason don't go down too well with everyone in Hastings, rather like her comments at the Conservative Party conference in the autumn as Home Secretary did too, on lists of all known and suspected foreigners being provided by business.

Being born in Hastings and growing up and living in the area most of my live, I can understand the growing backlash against her, although there's no certainty her seat is at risk despite this and her not considerable majority.

Of course there's no certainty - happily the vast majority of voters in Hastings (and not the vociferous minority) probably will vote for her. I notice that you don't mention the other candidates - is that because most people would cross the road to avoid 'em? Easy to criticise, more difficult to produce a working alternative, as Corbyn, Tiny Tim and others will possibly find out.

 

[SK1NT]

always amuses me, so today i think we'll ask, name a policy under this government that is "for the rich". i can think of one borderline (that benefits anyone).

and on anecdotes, a couple i know used to live in Hastings slight left wing, were screwed by the last Labour government's nanny state largess known as working tax credits. they got caught up in the "you got paid more than we thought you should " debacle and had to pay back thousands. they didnt "need" the credits in the first place but were encouraged to claim. when she got a better job that took them above the threshold, she said that was that was best part of the promotion, and would never vote Labour again for causing so much stress.

The cutting of disability benefits and yet tax breaks to large companies?

Cap the incomes of Britain's lowest paid workers whilst belligerently opposing any kind of cap on the incomes of Britain's wealthiest workers

you want more? had to post quickly as i won't be online for a while and wanted you to have some food for thought.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

And that's how the middle classes convince themselves that they are caring sharing lot and that their predicament is just as bad as the very poorest. Potentially struggling to meet a payment on a loan in a months time against the nice asset you have over your head <> not being able to feed your family. Suggesting so demonstrates how far you are from understanding why we hate the tories.

What next? The pony's grooming fees are really stretching us = Can't afford new shoes?

You are clearly someone that hasn't been in the situation where you're nearly not able to afford the mortgage - or indeed has gone into arrears. It's scary, stressful and plummets many people into depression and you get ZERO help from either the bank, council or the DWP. You risk losing somewhere to live. I suggest you try it before posting such flippant comments. I have and after three months of not being able to pay the mortgage it gets VERY VERY nasty. Oh, for the record, for me it happened under a Labour government and they gave ZERO help. Labour = Nasty, Tories = Nasty.

 

[wellquickwoody]

They were far from perfect, that is fair to say. Once again though, the reason many people hate the tories is there policy preference for the most wealthy v those most in need. Have a listen to R5 right now, a man talking about his mum and her care needs and the social worker recommending the solution to her inability to look after her own toilet needs overnight - Adult nappies, you can guess that when he blamed the £4.6b cuts in social care he probably hates the tories.

My own situation - My mum needs a lot of care, it's costing her/me about £5,000 a month, the government offering is £55 a week. I am not complaining, we can afford it but many cannot and their loved ones would be in the same situation as above, lying in their on filth until the care arrives. That's what we're talking about here, people who cannot care for themselves, people who cannot feed themselves, in 2017 in 'Great' Britain. Complain about struggling to meet future mortgage payments all you like but this why I and many others hate the tories,

To be affording 5k per month you are either very rich or you have property probably paid for by a mortgage?

 

[beorhthelm]

The cutting of disability benefits and yet tax breaks to large companies?

Cap the incomes of Britain's lowest paid workers whilst belligerently opposing any kind of cap on the incomes of Britain's wealthiest workers

you want more? had to post quickly as i won't be online for a while and wanted you to have some food for thought.

you could just state a policy in favour of the rich, instead of rolling off a number of things you dont like or made up - since when were incomes of lowest paid capped?

 

[Steve.S]

What utter bloody claptrap! Not being able to pay the mortgage is just as bad as not affording food, in fact worse, as it will mean no food and no roof as poster will not be in receipt of housing benefit to pay his rent. As for 'the tories because they systematically and knowingly see people in to poverty while feathering the nests of their bretheren', where did you get this regurgitated soundbite from, the Militant 1980's handbook. It is precisely because of idiots like you that Labour do not have a cat in hells chance at the polls. Go and join the Socialist Party , or the Communist Party or some other dogmatic looney anarchist group that you can identify with and leave to rebuild and provide a respectable opposition to the Tories.

Go and talk class war and envy with your other Momentum chums in the Cowley Club.

Well said

 

[ManOfSussex]

Of course there's no certainty - happily the vast majority of voters in Hastings (and not the vociferous minority) probably will vote for her. I notice that you don't mention the other candidates - is that because most people would cross the road to avoid 'em? Easy to criticise, more difficult to produce a working alternative, as Corbyn, Tiny Tim and others will possibly find out.

Happily for you, her and Conservative supporters, if you consider the Labour candidate, Peter Chowney, who's worked in local Government for the best part of 20 years, is current leader of the council and does more in 7 days for Hastings, than she's done in her 7 years since being parachuted in by Conservative central office, is not the best candidate for the constituency. - Is that mentioning of another candidate a good enough working alternative for you? There's plenty in Hastings who think so and despite losing 3 seats in East Sussex Country Council elections last week, Labour got the most amount of votes in Hastings. They weren't a vociferous minority then for some reason.

There's never been much Lib Dem support in Hastings - it's always been Conservative v Labour - Green voters may well tactically vote this time and the UKIP support last time could go anywhere and I can think of a few who certainly wont be voting Conservative.

 

[mikeyjh]

To be affording 5k per month you are either very rich or you have property probably paid for by a mortgage?

I'm not sure why that's relevant but for what it's worth, I don't have a mortgage and fortunately can cover some of mum's costs but not rich, no. I am genuinely trying to answer the question here about why we hate the tories and I hoped I gave some insight with this post. People suffer because of cuts deliberately and with calculation by the tories.

 

[Steve.S]

Edit

 

[Deleted member 22389]

I'm not sure why that's relevant but for what it's worth, I don't have a mortgage and fortunately can cover some of mum's costs but not rich, no. I am genuinely trying to answer the question here about why we hate the tories and I hoped I gave some insight with this post. People suffer because of cuts deliberately and with calculation by the tories.

Before my dad passed away in 2004 he suffered from bi-polar disorder. I can remember then the nightmare of trying to get my dad some help, he needed to be looked after because he was on the verge of burning our house down. In the end we got that help, but it was the same story of not having enough beds. I also remember my grandma being stuck on a trolley outside A&E for hours, that was also under the Labour government. We all have our experiences of governments. I just don't hate Labour for that, there are other things.

 

[mikeyjh]

Before my dad passed away in 2004 he suffered from bi-polar disorder. I can remember then the nightmare of trying to get my dad some help, he needed to be looked after because he was on the verge of burning our house down. In the end we got that help, but it was the same story of not having enough beds. I also remember my grandma being stuck on a trolley outside A&E for hours, that was also under the Labour government. We all have our experiences of governments. I just don't hate Labour for that, there are other things.

Then I think you've answered your own question - The NHS wasn't great and the toris are deliberately let it run down (in preparation for privatisation), that's why people hate the Tories.

In defence of Labour, they will not get everything right but for those who oppose the nasties, it's about their intent, that's why we hate them.

 

[wellquickwoody]

I'm not sure why that's relevant but for what it's worth, I don't have a mortgage and fortunately can cover some of mum's costs but not rich, no. I am genuinely trying to answer the question here about why we hate the tories and I hoped I gave some insight with this post. People suffer because of cuts deliberately and with calculation by the tories.

You don't have a mortgage, so I guess you own your home. You either bought it with a mortgage or you were given it by your parents if that is the case, or maybe you have a very well paid job.

If you are renting but can still cover 5k per month care costs then you still have a very good job. I am struggling to understand your criticism of someone struggling to pay a mortgage when compared to someone struggling to buy food, in reality both are in the shit but one can receive benefits whilst one probably cannot.

Unless I see some cohesive, intelligible response I will not be bothered to respond to your next point/query, but will reserve the right to blow holes in your hollow trolling.

 

[spring hall convert]

You are clearly someone that hasn't been in the situation where you're nearly not able to afford the mortgage - or indeed has gone into arrears. It's scary, stressful and plummets many people into depression and you get ZERO help from either the bank, council or the DWP. You risk losing somewhere to live. I suggest you try it before posting such flippant comments. I have and after three months of not being able to pay the mortgage it gets VERY VERY nasty. Oh, for the record, for me it happened under a Labour government and they gave ZERO help. Labour = Nasty, Tories = Nasty.

Just for a bit of political balance, my parents and a lot of people had their houses repossessed after the ERM debacle. A mess completely of the Tories making. Labour does not have the exclusive on economic failure, far from it in fact if you look at the numbers.

Horrible thing to have to go through as a kid. I expect it was worse for my parents.

 

[Bodian]

always amuses me, so today i think we'll ask, name a policy under this government that is "for the rich". i can think of one borderline (that benefits anyone).

These are just a few things I have quickly cut-and-paste from articles easily findable online from the last few years; some are on the same theme but from different budgets. There are others - take your pick.

Sweeping changes to benefits and income tax have had the effect of switching income from the poorer half of households to most of the richer half, with the poorest 5% in the country in terms of income losing nearly 3% of what they would have earned if Britain’s tax and welfare system of May 2010 had been retained.

The Resolution Foundation have found that 67% of the Tory welfare cuts will impoverish the poorest third of UK families, whilst 80% of the tax cuts are being handed to the well off.

The government has promised to protect state pensions, which will rise yet again this year by 3%. Rich folk, meanwhile, are doing well. In the budget the threshold for the higher rate of income tax was increased from £42,385 to £45,000. The median full-time employee, who earns £28,000 a year, will not benefit. Even the pledge to raise the personal allowance for income tax, from £10,600 to £11,500, is not especially pro-poor because over 40% of adults do not earn enough to pay any income tax.

Scrapping Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) forced thousands of students to opt out of higher education. EMA gave money to 16-18 year-olds who continued their education after the school leaving age. The rich can afford to pay for higher education, therefore such a policy benefits only the rich in the long run.

The trebling of tuition fees to £9000 reflects that the Tories believe that further education is only for the rich

Bedroom Tax which was simply an unfair, cruel policy. This policy inflicted hardship and suffering on children in poverty and people with disabilities. 375,000 children in poverty will suffer as a result and 420,000 disabled people will be worse off.

Legal Aid savagely cut - the wealthy can still afford it, those who are poor cannot - and are therefore more likely to suffer from miscarriages of justice, or simply put in a guilty plea, even though they weren't, to avoid costs being awarded against them.

Falling taxes – top rate of tax cut from 50% to 45% for those earning over £150,000 a year. This is 1% of the population who earn 13% of the income.

No mansion tax and caps on council tax mean that the highest value properties are taxed proportionately less than average houses.

Wealthy benefited most from Quantitative Easing (QE) – the Bank of England say that as 50% of households have little or no financial assets, almost all the financial benefit of QE was for the wealthiest 50% of households, with the wealthiest 10% taking the lions share

Cutting the rate of capital-gains tax (CGT), most benefits the asset-rich, was not. Of the £30 billion of capital gains subject to CGT in 2013-14, half went to 35,000 individuals with incomes of £100,000 a year or more

The richest will reap 80% of the rewards from the tax and benefit changes that came into effect in April 2017, while the poorest will become worse off, according to detailed analysis by the Resolution Foundation. The independent thinktank’s research shows that the effect of £2bn of income tax cuts and more than £1bn of welfare cuts will add up to a huge transfer of wealth from low- and middle-income households to richer ones. The reforms, set in train by former chancellor George Osborne, run directly contrary to the political mantra of Theresa May, who has said she wants to govern in the interests of everyone and “not just the privileged few”. The changes include raising the personal tax allowance from £11,000 to £11,500; lifting the threshold for higher-rate tax from £43,000 to £45,000; freezing all working-age benefits; removing the family element (£545) from tax credits and universal credit for new claims or births; and applying a two-child limit to new claims or births in the tax credit system. David Finch, senior economic analyst at the Resolution Foundation, said: “The overall package amounts to a £1bn net giveaway from the public purse. But the skewed nature of this generosity means that better-off households will receive four-fifths of the gains, while the poorest third of households will be worse off overall."

Since 2010 the number of children growing up in poverty has risen by 400,000. There has been a huge rise in food bank dependency since 2010. That's not a 'co-incidence'.

In 2016 Tory MPs (1/3 of whom are landlords) voted down an opposition amendment to their housing bill that would have required landlords to ensure that rented accommodation is "fit for human habitation". The wealthy tend to be landlords, the poorer - tenants.

 

[mikeyjh]

You don't have a mortgage, so I guess you own your home. You either bought it with a mortgage or you were given it by your parents if that is the case, or maybe you have a very well paid job.

If you are renting but can still cover 5k per month care costs then you still have a very good job. I am struggling to understand your criticism of someone struggling to pay a mortgage when compared to someone struggling to buy food, in reality both are in the shit but one can receive benefits whilst one probably cannot.

Unless I see some cohesive, intelligible response I will not be bothered to respond to your next point/query, but will reserve the right to blow holes in your hollow trolling.

My personal circumstances remain irrelevant, however much they excite you but, again for what it's worth, I grew up with a single mother and we didn't have a pot to p1ss in so no it wasn't gifted. We did, however, borrow very much within our means at approx 1.5 times average salary. So now you know. That doesn't change the fact from my first post that this isn't about me, or you, it's about those who are most desperate, those who depend on food banks, those who depend on the state for care. They are suffering from massive cuts and that's why we hate the tories.

To compare struggling to pay for the loan on you house with going for hand outs to eat, as you're trying to do, is quite silly.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

These are just a few things I have quickly cut-and-paste from articles easily findable online from the last few years; some are on the same theme but from different budgets. There are others - take your pick.

Sweeping changes to benefits and income tax have had the effect of switching income from the poorer half of households to most of the richer half, with the poorest 5% in the country in terms of income losing nearly 3% of what they would have earned if Britain’s tax and welfare system of May 2010 had been retained.

The Resolution Foundation have found that 67% of the Tory welfare cuts will impoverish the poorest third of UK families, whilst 80% of the tax cuts are being handed to the well off.

The government has promised to protect state pensions, which will rise yet again this year by 3%. Rich folk, meanwhile, are doing well. In the budget the threshold for the higher rate of income tax was increased from £42,385 to £45,000. The median full-time employee, who earns £28,000 a year, will not benefit. Even the pledge to raise the personal allowance for income tax, from £10,600 to £11,500, is not especially pro-poor because over 40% of adults do not earn enough to pay any income tax.

Scrapping Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) forced thousands of students to opt out of higher education. EMA gave money to 16-18 year-olds who continued their education after the school leaving age. The rich can afford to pay for higher education, therefore such a policy benefits only the rich in the long run.

The trebling of tuition fees to £9000 reflects that the Tories believe that further education is only for the rich

Bedroom Tax which was simply an unfair, cruel policy. This policy inflicted hardship and suffering on children in poverty and people with disabilities. 375,000 children in poverty will suffer as a result and 420,000 disabled people will be worse off.

Legal Aid savagely cut - the wealthy can still afford it, those who are poor cannot - and are therefore more likely to suffer from miscarriages of justice, or simply put in a guilty plea, even though they weren't, to avoid costs being awarded against them.

Falling taxes – top rate of tax cut from 50% to 45% for those earning over £150,000 a year. This is 1% of the population who earn 13% of the income.

No mansion tax and caps on council tax mean that the highest value properties are taxed proportionately less than average houses.

Wealthy benefited most from Quantitative Easing (QE) – the Bank of England say that as 50% of households have little or no financial assets, almost all the financial benefit of QE was for the wealthiest 50% of households, with the wealthiest 10% taking the lions share

Cutting the rate of capital-gains tax (CGT), most benefits the asset-rich, was not. Of the £30 billion of capital gains subject to CGT in 2013-14, half went to 35,000 individuals with incomes of £100,000 a year or more

The richest will reap 80% of the rewards from the tax and benefit changes that came into effect in April 2017, while the poorest will become worse off, according to detailed analysis by the Resolution Foundation. The independent thinktank’s research shows that the effect of £2bn of income tax cuts and more than £1bn of welfare cuts will add up to a huge transfer of wealth from low- and middle-income households to richer ones. The reforms, set in train by former chancellor George Osborne, run directly contrary to the political mantra of Theresa May, who has said she wants to govern in the interests of everyone and “not just the privileged few”. The changes include raising the personal tax allowance from £11,000 to £11,500; lifting the threshold for higher-rate tax from £43,000 to £45,000; freezing all working-age benefits; removing the family element (£545) from tax credits and universal credit for new claims or births; and applying a two-child limit to new claims or births in the tax credit system. David Finch, senior economic analyst at the Resolution Foundation, said: “The overall package amounts to a £1bn net giveaway from the public purse. But the skewed nature of this generosity means that better-off households will receive four-fifths of the gains, while the poorest third of households will be worse off overall."

Since 2010 the number of children growing up in poverty has risen by 400,000. There has been a huge rise in food bank dependency since 2010. That's not a 'co-incidence'.

In 2016 Tory MPs (1/3 of whom are landlords) voted down an opposition amendment to their housing bill that would have required landlords to ensure that rented accommodation is "fit for human habitation". The wealthy tend to be landlords, the poorer - tenants.

In January I am getting 30hrs free child care a week, it means I can send my daughter to Nursery and look for extra work. That's a good thing in my book, its an incentive to get people out to work. This applies to people earning under £81,000. This will benefit thousands of parents who have been trapped unable to afford child care, like myself who could only stretch to two mornings a week. The government does help people, not everything is bad.

 

[ManOfSussex]

In January I am getting 30hrs free child care a week, it means I can send my daughter to Nursery and look for extra work. That's a good thing in my book, its an incentive to get people out to work. This applies to people earning under £81,000. This will benefit thousands of parents who have been trapped unable to afford child care, like myself who could only stretch to two mornings a week. The government does help people, not everything is bad.

Is that where the cuts to PIP and ESA are going then? The Government aren't helping people with those cuts.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

someone has sprayed The Clash on that

Perhaps it was the man himself. I smiled when I saw it, for some reason

 

[Soulman]

In January I am getting 30hrs free child care a week, it means I can send my daughter to Nursery and look for extra work. That's a good thing in my book, its an incentive to get people out to work. This applies to people earning under £81,000. This will benefit thousands of parents who have been trapped unable to afford child care, like myself who could only stretch to two mornings a week. The government does help people, not everything is bad.

Great post and after reading and agreeing with your posts, I am pleased for you, your hard work and striving has paid off.
Good luck.